Re: Point in Time Recovery - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD
Subject Re: Point in Time Recovery
Date
Msg-id 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA40184D152@m0114.s-mxs.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Point in Time Recovery  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Point in Time Recovery  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> > I'm aiming for the minimum feature set - which means we do need to take
> > care over whether that set is insufficient and also to pull any part
> > that doesn't stand up to close scrutiny over the next few days.
>
> As you can see, we are still chewing on NT.  What PITR features are
> missing?  I assume because we can't stop file system writes during
> backup that we will need a backup parameter file like I described.  Is
> there anything else that PITR needs?

No, we don't need to stop writes ! Not even to split a mirror,
other db's need that to be able to restore, but we dont.
We only need to tell people to backup pg_control first. The rest was only
intended to enforce
1. that pg_control is the first file backed up
2. the dba uses a large enough PIT (or xid) for restore

I think the idea with an extra file with WAL start position was overly
complicated, since all you need is pg_control (+ WAL end position to enforce 2.).

If we don't want to tell people to backup pg_control first, imho the next
best plan would be to add a "WAL start" input (e.g. xlog name) parameter
to recovery.conf, that "fixes" pg_control.

Andreas


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Anja Klein"
Date:
Subject: analyze.c
Next
From: "Magnus Hagander"
Date:
Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Weird new time zone